Information contracts determine what inverse perturbation benchmarks measure

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.
Log in to save this article

Abstract

Inverse perturbation benchmarks rank interventions toward a desired cellular state, but high accuracy can answer a different question from biological prioritization. We present InverseBench, which makes candidate information and endpoint construction explicit, and FSTN, a linear pipeline evaluated under it. With identical inputs, candidates and validation, nested ridge reaches Spearman 0.959 for a transcriptional principal-component proxy but 0.445 for independently measured K562 growth fitness across 7,354 genes. Controlled response-entry availability across seven tasks gives heterogeneous gains, 0.442 for CD4 activation and 0.116 for external fitness. Yet predefined shortlist comparisons show no primary-cutoff penalty in K562 or a melanoma co-culture screen, and secondary cutoffs reverse the K562 ordering. FSTN’s nonnegative set selector recovers 0.840 of measured two-gene constituents in three picks, against 0.771 for an unconstrained greedy. The framework separates proxy reconstruction, response-informed prioritization and unseen-intervention ranking: an endpoint-dependent accuracy gap does not by itself mean worse biological decisions.

Article activity feed